Incentives: Rebates for buyers of fuel-efficient cars, fees on the purchase of gas-guzzlers.

SACRAMENTO 
SACRAMENTO – A draft blueprint to stem global warming counts on businesses and everyday Californians to accept a mix of tough regulations and new fees, perhaps as much as $1.5 billion a year collected on targeted products and water bills.

The state Air Resources Board spent yesterday drawing praise and protest for its groundbreaking initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming.

Regulators now will refine the plan before they gather next month for a final vote on the blueprint, which would require a gradual rollback in emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, an approximately 25 percent cut.

Their vast proposals include allowing businesses to buy and sell emission credits, imposing fees on water use and requiring utilities to generate 33 percent of electricity from renewable sources. Vehicles are major targets: The plan lays out a framework for pursuing strict limits on tailpipe emissions.

Specifics, including detailed regulations, financial incentives and fees, will still need to be hammered out among regulators and lawmakers in time for a 2012 launch.

The air board hearing was just one in a string of developments over recent days that signal a willingness to confront the global warming threat even during a worldwide economic slump.

U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., yesterday introduced legislation calling for the federal government to invest $15 billion annually in clean energy, a move she said would reduce reliance on oil and coal while stimulating job growth.

Boxer also proposed a national “cap and trade” program that would limit industry emissions. To encourage compliance and investment in clean technology, companies that come in under the cap would be provided pollution credits that then could be sold to other businesses. Those companies could use the newly bought credits to comply with emissions standards. California already is pushing that idea as part of the air board plan.

“By investing in clean energy technologies and reducing our dependence on foreign oil, we also have a recipe for economic recovery,” Boxer said in a statement.

Boxer's package is similar to proposals advanced by President-elect Barack Obama, who addressed world leaders gathered in Beverly Hills this week for a two-day global warming summit organized by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In remarks delivered by video Tuesday, Obama unequivocally committed to pursuing remedies. “Now is the time to confront this challenge once and for all,” the Democrat said.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican who has gained international recognition for aggressively attacking global warming, said he's eager to join forces.

“We in California are ready to go and do everything that it takes in order to help his administration to follow through with his environmental vision,” the governor said.

Tops on California's agenda: obtaining federal permission to regulate vehicle tailpipe exhaust to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The Bush administration and automakers have resisted regulations, but officials in Sacramento are convinced Obama will act swiftly to grant authority to the state.

Adding to California's optimism is the ouster of an automaker ally, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Replacing him is Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, a staunch advocate of policies aimed at reducing global warming.

California estimates that about 30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions can be traced to the automobile. Vehicle regulations over time would account for 18 percent of the reduction in emissions, according to one state analysis of the air board plan.

The air board's draft plan also refers to “feebate” strategies that could be implemented to further cut vehicle emissions. The proposal calls for rewarding buyers of fuel-efficient cars with rebates. To discourage taking home gas-guzzlers, fees would be added to the purchase of large vehicles.

Just how far and fast California goes remains a work in progress as the state board grapples with its broader plan while trying to answer complaints that it costs too much.

Without a comprehensive strategy, regulators say, even slight increases in temperatures could trigger catastrophic climatic disruptions that threaten crops, water supplies and the environment.

Critics this week were supplied some ammunition by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Its analysis found that some of the air board's economic impact figures “are inconsistent and incomplete,” and it criticizes the air board for selecting strategies first and then doing the financial study “after the fact.”

Moreover, the air board has failed to lay out specifically how much compliance could cost and when businesses could expect to recoup those investments – an important consideration for companies struggling to adjust, the analysis pointed out.

Ron Roberts, an air board member and San Diego County supervisor, said gyrations over cost are premature, given that the board plans to work on cushioning the impact between now and 2012.

“We have a long way to go,” he said. “This really is a first step.”

Roberts said regulators must act even with the country in a slump.

“The economic meltdown is temporary,” he said. “What we're really confronted with is an environmental meltdown that cannot be ignored.”

But an array of business representatives fear higher costs passed on to them for electricity, gas and goods.

“It's going to really hurt us. This is the wrong time,” said Marco Polo Cortes, president of the San Diego County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

The air board is studying a water fee to raise between $100 million and $500 million annually. The thinking is that it takes a lot of energy, thus high greenhouse gas emissions, to move water to farms, businesses and homes. Such a fee is not unprecedented. For example, the state collects 19 cents a month from San Diego Gas & Electric Co. customers, some of which is plowed back into programs to encourage conservation. The new water fee could be used to accomplish similar goals, regulators say.

An additional $300 million to $1 billion could be raised by taxing certain products associated with high emissions, such as refrigerants and insulation. A share of the money could go to a rebate plan to encourage consumers to buy energy-efficient appliances. Removing one old refrigerator could save the same amount of emissions generated by a car in a year, air board officials say.